Addition confirmed for non filing of affidavit stating that the assessee had not agreed for the addition during the assessment proceedings as stated in assessment order
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2452 (2018) 08 ITAT
The instant appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by CIT(A) in confirming disallowance of interest and PPF interest expenses.
The assessee had filed return of income electronically. Being a survey case, the case of assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) was issued. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the assessee had claimed interest and PPF expenses against the disclosure of income during the survey.
The AO was of the view that since the disclosure was over and above regular income earned by the assessee, no expenses could be claimed out of the said undisclosed income. It was recorded by the AO in the assessment order that the issue about disclosure and admissibility of the expenditure had been discussed with the AR of the assessee, and the AR agreed for the addition.
The AO accordingly made an addition.
The CIT(A) observed that as per the assessment order, the AR of the appellant had agreed for the proposed addition during the assessment proceedings. However, the appellant had not made any submission on this account during the appellate proceedings. In absence of any evidences filed, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO in making the disallowance and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
On consideration of the above facts and circumstances, the Tribunal observed that authorised representative of the assessee has admitted the proposed adition before the AO. However, no affidavit had been filed before the CIT(A) deposing therein that the AR of the assessee had not admitted the addition before the AO without his permission nor affidavit of the authorized representative had been filed stating therein that he had not agreed to before the AO about the above addition.
Therefore, in view of the concurrent finding of the both the authorities below indicating that this addition was admitted by the assessee, the Tribunal declined to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
Download Full Judgment Click Here >>
When assessee failed to explain source of purchases expenditure, estimating profit rate was contrary to provision of Section 69C which…
Income Tax Department not trusted even upon its lawyers – SC slams ITD on adopting a long process resulting delay…
When goods are loaded in two trucks with one e-way bill specifically mentioning both truck numbers, no intention to evade…
GOI makes four new Labour Codes effective from 21st November 2025 Government of India has announced that the four Labour…
Provident fund dues definitely have a first charge over claim of bank under SARFAESI Act – Supreme Court In a…
CBDT notifies the Capital Gains Accounts (Second Amendment) Scheme, 2025 MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Revenue) (CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT…